|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 10 2016 05:00 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 04:56 WhiteDog wrote:On November 10 2016 04:51 Logo wrote:On November 10 2016 04:46 WhiteDog wrote:On November 10 2016 04:33 207aicila wrote:
Curious if anyone here has seen this series of tweets (there are more, and more interesting ones from her in the replies) and what your thoughts are.
It's definitely a trend that's been growing a lot recently on the internet but I always assumed it's more of a fringe internet minority and nothing something likely to leave a significant impact. And people like this girl are partly responsible for this. If people have shitty ideas, then engage with them and discuss. There's reason to everything : the moral kabbal that some people in the left created in the last few years participated in the appearance of the "alt right". On a campus, you should discuss everything with everyone. Her twitter feed is a beautiful exemple of cognitive bias. "Those white men, they're sexist and racist and hating on us, and they elected him for that" : no, it's the economy stupid. I don't disagree with problems of communication in a general sense, but have you see alt-right places like /r/the_donald and 4chan? You're basically arguing that people should try and have reasonable discussions over Twitch Chat, except in this case everyone else in chat hates what you have to say on principal alone. You can't have a reasonable argument on the internet in a place like a twitch chat or reddit where trolling is the rule, but in a class room or on a college campus, in face to face interactions, you can talk with anyone. When you insult someone and assimilate everything he or she says to his/her caracteristics (men or women, white or not, etc.) you lose all chance to actually engage in a good discussion. Yeah, and I think that's where we agree. But from my perspective the alt right is a movement that's deeply seeded in online communities and has a much weaker physical presence. Someone who's actively on US campuses may disagree with that (would be interested to hear about it). Anyways with that perceptions that's why I scoff at the idea of engaging the alt right, the only forms they seem to occupy as an organizational force are ones where trolling is the rule.
Part of the reason for the lack of physical presence is probably because of the way they are met with an instantaneous attempt at shaming them to silence if they ever dare speak up in public. Further, can you even blame them considering the complete and utter lack of introspection from "progressives" like the ones whose twitter was linked? (Note: I use "" to denote that I don't actually consider her progressive).
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 10 2016 05:01 Nevuk wrote:
Also, I'm seeing the progressives trying to lobby behind Tulsi Gabbard at the moment. (She was like the one member of the DNC to support Sanders, resigned from being vice president of something or other in it due to her decision). The idea being that supporting someone who has worked and was respected by those within the system is probably the best way to get an foothold, I think. I actually don't even know if she wants any positions or not lol
lol this is a deeper level of bubble than even hillaryland. noexit.
tulsi gabbard is the exact wrong choice. they should draft a guy like dean baker or one of the roosevelt institute guys.
|
For me the two defining moments where when trump stumped the pope in his tweet about the Vatican walls,and when Clinton called trump supporters deplorable.
That must have contributed so much to Clintons downfall. She already had the image of Washington elitist,and then calling a large part of the country "deplorable" did confirm that image for many voters I think.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On November 10 2016 05:02 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 04:59 Souma wrote:
DNC has no one to blame but themselves. Really? I blame the DNC too but you don't think the people that, you know, actually voted for Orange Hitler deserve some of the blame?
Well, if you want to get technical, then yeah you can blame them too.
But the DNC completely blew what should have been an easy race.
Oh well! Hopefully Trump does terribly and ignites a fire into progressives to turn out for the midterms and take the 2020 elections and the redrawing of districts.
|
On November 10 2016 05:07 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 05:00 Logo wrote:On November 10 2016 04:56 WhiteDog wrote:On November 10 2016 04:51 Logo wrote:On November 10 2016 04:46 WhiteDog wrote:On November 10 2016 04:33 207aicila wrote:Curious if anyone here has seen this series of tweets (there are more, and more interesting ones from her in the replies) and what your thoughts are. https://twitter.com/SiyandaWrites/status/796286719058382848It's definitely a trend that's been growing a lot recently on the internet but I always assumed it's more of a fringe internet minority and nothing something likely to leave a significant impact. And people like this girl are partly responsible for this. If people have shitty ideas, then engage with them and discuss. There's reason to everything : the moral kabbal that some people in the left created in the last few years participated in the appearance of the "alt right". On a campus, you should discuss everything with everyone. Her twitter feed is a beautiful exemple of cognitive bias. "Those white men, they're sexist and racist and hating on us, and they elected him for that" : no, it's the economy stupid. I don't disagree with problems of communication in a general sense, but have you see alt-right places like /r/the_donald and 4chan? You're basically arguing that people should try and have reasonable discussions over Twitch Chat, except in this case everyone else in chat hates what you have to say on principal alone. You can't have a reasonable argument on the internet in a place like a twitch chat or reddit where trolling is the rule, but in a class room or on a college campus, in face to face interactions, you can talk with anyone. When you insult someone and assimilate everything he or she says to his/her caracteristics (men or women, white or not, etc.) you lose all chance to actually engage in a good discussion. Yeah, and I think that's where we agree. But from my perspective the alt right is a movement that's deeply seeded in online communities and has a much weaker physical presence. Someone who's actively on US campuses may disagree with that (would be interested to hear about it). Anyways with that perceptions that's why I scoff at the idea of engaging the alt right, the only forms they seem to occupy as an organizational force are ones where trolling is the rule. Part of the reason for the lack of physical presence is probably because of the way they are met with an instantaneous attempt at shaming them to silence if they ever dare speak up in public. Further, can you even blame them considering the complete and utter lack of introspection from "progressives" like the ones whose twitter was linked? (Note: I use "" to denote that I don't actually consider her progressive).
That's a very circular logic, "I'm afraid to express my movement in public because my movement online is mostly about trolling and harassment". Of course no one is going to take a movement seriously when their only public expressions as individuals are harassing women, trolling, and other unsavory acts and their more official channels tend to be regarded as some of the most skewed reporting available.
Like can you show me some positive things the alt-right stands for?
|
On November 10 2016 05:08 pmh wrote:
For me the two defining moments where when trump stumped the pope in his tweet about the Vatican walls,and when Clinton called trump supporters deplorable.
That must have contributed so much to Clintons downfall. She already had the image of Washington elitist,and then calling a large part of the country "deplorable" did confirm that image for many voters I think.
Yeah that was her Romney moment actually.
|
On November 10 2016 05:02 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 04:59 Souma wrote:
DNC has no one to blame but themselves. Really? I blame the DNC too but you don't think the people that, you know, actually voted for Orange Hitler deserve some of the blame?
Or the FBI or the media that created a ridiculous email scandal based on almost nothing.
I saw some analyses that the DNC was to blame for supporting a 'scandal-ridden, unpopular candidate' in Clinton, but I find that weird. Pretty much all her scandals are based on GOP slander or social media whisper campaigns, and much of what makes her unpopular is sexist prejudice against the first female candidate. And the DNC is not directly to blame for literal voter suppression efforts by the GOP across southern states. HRC was the most qualified person to be running for president and she won the Democratic primaries fair and square, she has a wide coalition of women, minorities, coastal cities, millennials, educated people etc. that allowed her to win the popular vote.
Of course the DNC should have some blame, but Trump being elected is more a symptom of dysfunctional institutions and media, and deep rooted anti-intellectualism, sexism and racism among white voters, rather than any specific failure of the DNC.
|
On November 10 2016 04:32 LegalLord wrote:
Curious, how many of you have actually been to the border and know to what extent there is one in place?
That few, huh?
Alright, so I'll explain this. Over the past 15 years I've been to Mexico more than a few times. I've had a chance to see perfectly well how the border has evolved over that time. Back 15 years ago, the border was almost trivial, something like what you would find between states. A few border patrol officers who do little but check for export restrictions on agriculture and the like, but who just let regular people pass. On the Mexican side, sometimes it was just 1-2 guys who really didn't care and never really checked anything substantial.
Over the years that has all changed. First, if you want to cross the border without a valid passport then you could forget about it. Then, a fence running along its length, border patrols with dozens of people, and a passport verification check every time you want to enter the US. Not to mention patrols along the border cities and multiple secondary border checks. It reminds me of what borders looked like back home.
My point is, there is already something very closely approximating a wall. Maybe his wall will be just a slight boost and a few holes filled in. A few more inches of barbed wire, more checks for contraband, maybe some watchtowers. He can fulfill his promise on the cheap because it's already mostly done.
|
On November 10 2016 05:11 MyLovelyLurker wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 05:08 pmh wrote:
For me the two defining moments where when trump stumped the pope in his tweet about the Vatican walls,and when Clinton called trump supporters deplorable.
That must have contributed so much to Clintons downfall. She already had the image of Washington elitist,and then calling a large part of the country "deplorable" did confirm that image for many voters I think. Yeah that was her Romney moment actually.
This is ridiculous though. The statement has like 1/10th of the bite of over a dozen of choice Trump quotes.
|
I don't understand why the GOP doesn't really bring up education. Common core was by all accounts a failure - even by its supporters.
|
On November 10 2016 05:14 Nevuk wrote:
I don't understand why the GOP doesn't really bring up education. Common core was by all accounts a failure - even by its supporters.
Trump brought it up in several of his rallies.
|
On November 10 2016 05:13 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 04:32 LegalLord wrote:
Curious, how many of you have actually been to the border and know to what extent there is one in place? That few, huh? Alright, so I'll explain this. Over the past 15 years I've been to Mexico more than a few times. I've had a chance to see perfectly well how the border has evolved over that time. Back 15 years ago, the border was almost trivial, something like what you would find between states. A few border patrol officers who do little but check for export restrictions on agriculture and the like, but who just let regular people pass. On the Mexican side, sometimes it was just 1-2 guys who really didn't care and never really checked anything substantial. Over the years that has all changed. First, if you want to cross the border without a valid passport then you could forget about it. Then, a fence running along its length, border patrols with dozens of people, and a passport verification check every time you want to enter the US. Not to mention patrols along the border cities and multiple secondary border checks. It reminds me of what borders looked like back home. My point is, there is already something very closely approximating a wall. Maybe his wall will be just a slight boost and a few holes filled in. A few more inches of barbed wire, more checks for contraband, maybe some watchtowers. He can fulfill his promise on the cheap because it's already mostly done.
Uh you know the border is pretty long right? From what I could find there's about 600 miles of fence for 1900 miles of border.
|
If there is a silver lining to all of this, it's that I'll never have to hear or see Hillary Rodham Clinton ever again.
2 failed Presidential bids, she isn't getting run again. All of the "tow the line" Democrats that supported her can all shut their collective mouths and start rethinking their stances on everything.
I'm still bitter about what the DNC did to the Sanders campaign, and now I have another reason to be. They handed all 3 branches of government to the GOP.
|
Because a less educated populace is their core demographic?
|
On November 10 2016 05:14 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 05:11 MyLovelyLurker wrote:On November 10 2016 05:08 pmh wrote:
For me the two defining moments where when trump stumped the pope in his tweet about the Vatican walls,and when Clinton called trump supporters deplorable.
That must have contributed so much to Clintons downfall. She already had the image of Washington elitist,and then calling a large part of the country "deplorable" did confirm that image for many voters I think. Yeah that was her Romney moment actually. This is ridiculous though. The statement has like 1/10th of the bite of over a dozen of choice Trump quotes.
Agreed that it's a ridiculous double standard, but the awful things that an alpha-male billionaire reality television star says is viewed as simple "locker room talk", whereas a professional and put-together politician isn't *supposed* to say bad things. I'm not surprised.
|
On November 10 2016 05:08 pmh wrote:
For me the two defining moments where when trump stumped the pope in his tweet about the Vatican walls,and when Clinton called trump supporters deplorable.
That must have contributed so much to Clintons downfall. She already had the image of Washington elitist,and then calling a large part of the country "deplorable" did confirm that image for many voters I think.
True.
But I can't get over the fact so many people apparently have no problem stepping over the so many absolutely deplorable things Trump said.
Seriously people, what are you doing!?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
everyone knows border security is pretty tight now. i've not been down there but people who've been there for immigration law work all talk about the militarization of the border zone. it's obviously a symbolic issue.
most human flow across the border would be human trafficking connected with gangs and such, not individual economic migration.
|
United States15275 Posts
On November 10 2016 05:12 Grumbels wrote:
Of course the DNC should have some blame, but Trump being elected is more a symptom of dysfunctional institutions and media, and deep rooted anti-intellectualism, sexism and racism among white voters, rather than any specific failure of the DNC.
You do realize that this is one of the reasons why she lost so heavily in the Midwest? When your primary constituents label people who don't support your candidates as ignorant troglodytes rooted in the past, they'll just double down on their choice. Clinton advocated groups that had no problem polarizing the discussion into one of moral rectitude, and their sanctimonious puffery lost her any chance to flip those wavering on their choice.
Also the DNC has failed on so many issues it's sickening, Remember this used to be the party synonymous with labor and unions 35-40 years. And they lost that demographic to a party that has arguably never lived up to their promises.
|
On November 10 2016 05:13 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 04:32 LegalLord wrote:
Curious, how many of you have actually been to the border and know to what extent there is one in place? That few, huh? Alright, so I'll explain this. Over the past 15 years I've been to Mexico more than a few times. I've had a chance to see perfectly well how the border has evolved over that time. Back 15 years ago, the border was almost trivial, something like what you would find between states. A few border patrol officers who do little but check for export restrictions on agriculture and the like, but who just let regular people pass. On the Mexican side, sometimes it was just 1-2 guys who really didn't care and never really checked anything substantial. Over the years that has all changed. First, if you want to cross the border without a valid passport then you could forget about it. Then, a fence running along its length, border patrols with dozens of people, and a passport verification check every time you want to enter the US. Not to mention patrols along the border cities and multiple secondary border checks. It reminds me of what borders looked like back home. My point is, there is already something very closely approximating a wall. Maybe his wall will be just a slight boost and a few holes filled in. A few more inches of barbed wire, more checks for contraband, maybe some watchtowers. He can fulfill his promise on the cheap because it's already mostly done.
A fence is not a wall. Although I agree with you that this would be a more reasonable suggestion and with the same practical consequences (none whatsoever, except maybe a very minor bump in the price of smuggling).
In neither case is Mexico paying for anything, though.
|
On November 10 2016 05:16 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2016 05:13 LegalLord wrote:On November 10 2016 04:32 LegalLord wrote:
Curious, how many of you have actually been to the border and know to what extent there is one in place? That few, huh? Alright, so I'll explain this. Over the past 15 years I've been to Mexico more than a few times. I've had a chance to see perfectly well how the border has evolved over that time. Back 15 years ago, the border was almost trivial, something like what you would find between states. A few border patrol officers who do little but check for export restrictions on agriculture and the like, but who just let regular people pass. On the Mexican side, sometimes it was just 1-2 guys who really didn't care and never really checked anything substantial. Over the years that has all changed. First, if you want to cross the border without a valid passport then you could forget about it. Then, a fence running along its length, border patrols with dozens of people, and a passport verification check every time you want to enter the US. Not to mention patrols along the border cities and multiple secondary border checks. It reminds me of what borders looked like back home. My point is, there is already something very closely approximating a wall. Maybe his wall will be just a slight boost and a few holes filled in. A few more inches of barbed wire, more checks for contraband, maybe some watchtowers. He can fulfill his promise on the cheap because it's already mostly done. Uh you know the border is pretty long right? From what I could find there's about 600 miles of fence for 1900 miles of border.
Much of it is mountain terrain which is all but impassable. Some of it is vulnerable I'm sure, but there has been a hell of a lot done there.
They're talking about a 50 foot concrete wall, but barbed wire would do the same job and cost very little. And a lot of what needs to be patched already is. This project can be scaled down substantially without breaking the bank.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
